Tuesday, January 8, 2013

WA State residents rise up against anti-self defense bill

image source
Mikael Thalen, Contributor
Activist Post

Rep. Sherry Appleton from the 23rd district in Washington State pre-filed House Bill 1012 on Dec. 5th of last year to do away with the state's Stand Your Ground law.

The Stand Your Ground law state's that a person may justifiably use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of an unlawful threat, without an obligation to retreat first. This law is most notably seen when one is defending their home or property.

Opponents of Stand Your Ground believe it gives too much leeway and will lead to unnecessary violence. Supporters state that defending one's self is a birth right and laws prohibiting so only cause more damage to law abiding citizens. They also point to studies showing that guns are used in defense of crime three-to-four times more often than they’re used in the commission of a crime.

When word of the bill got out, hundreds of Washington residents flooded Appleton's office with emails and phone calls, demanding the bill be removed. Appleton's office, overwhelmed with the response, decided to back off from the bill, at least for now.

Reports indicate that Appleton's lawyers will reword the bill and then re-submit it next session, which has citizens and local Representatives keeping close watch.

"I think it's too early to say the bill has been defeated. The 2013 session has not yet began and a lot can happen between now and the end of April. I do think the public outcry against the proposed legislation demonstrates that citizens are watching Olympia closely and are willing to take a stand," said Rep. David Taylor of the 15th district.

Rep. Matt Shea of the 4th district noted, "This is a perfect example of grassroots activism at its finest. The right to bear arms in defense of oneself is enshrined in Article 1, Section 24 of our State Constitution. We must be ever vigilant to protect our natural born rights as Americans."

Representatives Jason Overstreet and Carry Condotta from the 42nd and 12th district were also noted as bringing light to the issue as well as many of Washington's Open Carry activists.

If you would like to reach Rep. Sherry Appleton with your comments or concerns regarding the bill:

LEG 132F
PO Box 40600
Olympia, WA 98504-0600
(360) 786-7934
Email: appleton.sherry@leg.wa.gov
Website: http://housedemocrats.wa.gov/roster/rep-sherry-appleton/

This article first appeared at The Examiner HERE


This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


m said...

Americans need to learn how to IMPEACH.

mrbrucewayne said...

This is another Islamic Idea as in many Islamic ruled lands it is unlawful for one to defend oneself against even things like rape

Anonymous said...

ICK ACT of 1902... CAN'T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) - Protection Against Tyrannical Government.

The Dick Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities.

The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy.

The Dick Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders.

The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard.

Anonymous said...

Overturning or refusing to enforce these "stand your ground" laws is one of many ways to attack 2nd Amendment believers; others are not allowing gun carriage outside the home without a hard-to-get CCW permit, limiting size of ammo clips and amount of ammo that can be purchased, putting onerous taxes on gun and ammo purchases, etc. The Founders wanted us to have weapons just as powerful as those in goverment arsenals so we could defend ourselves against tyranny.

David Staats said...

We know how...... If it's about sex with another woman. Nothing as serious as all the illegal law breaking congressmen or a Pres. Who isn't a nationalized citizen. No, nothing impeachable there!

Anonymous said...

I guess that's what the drones are for.

David Staats said...

We know how to for sexual conduct, but not for really illegal stuff. Half of this congress, senate, and presidential cabinet could be impeached for this crap they are pulling.

Montgomery Scott said...

I wrote a letter.
It was actually quite good. I sent it on an open URL to this treasonous scumbag.

I see that the usual disinfo B.S. people are already here (mrbrucewayne).You must tire of this B.S. misdirection...

Anonymous said...

There are three unalienable Rights that Thomas Jefferson enumerated in his Declaration of Independence. These Rights are those of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

The Right to Life (as well as the other two) is paramount. It is not a privilege that Government may grant or take away at will; instead, it is God given. The right to defend one's self, loved ones, and property, therefore, is God given; and, the Constitution and Bill of Rights merely guarantee this and other Rights so enumerated.

m said...

But how do WE, legally, go about impeaching a state senator? a state representative? a US congressman?

Do all states have the same requirements to impeach or are the requirements different in each state? If a citizen wanted to impeach Rep Sherry Appleton from WA, how would they start? Details... It's all in the details.

Anonymous said...

“There exist a law, not written down anywhere, but inborn in our hearts; a law which comes to us not by training or custom or reading; a law which has come to us not by theory but from practice, not by instruction but by natural intuition. I refer to the law which lays it down that, if our lives are endangered by plots or violence or armed robbers or enemies, any and every method of protecting ourselves is morally right.”

Marcus Tullius


Tar and feathers...

Anonymous said...

America’s Biggest Killers: The Chart Anti-Gunners Don’t Want You To See

"#1 Tobacco Use - 529,000
#2 Medical Errors - 195,000
#3 Unintentional Injuries - 118,021
#4 Alcohol Abuse - 107,400
#5 Motor Vehicle Accidents - 34,485
#6 Unintentional Poisoning - 31,758
#7 Drug Abuse - 25,500
#8 Unintentional Falls - 24,792
(Non-firearm covers the use of many varied weapons -- knives, bats, hammers, poisons, and more.

#10 Firearm Homicides - 11,493

U.S. Deaths per year, from selected causes: Sources: CDC, FBI, U.S. Federal Government"

Anonymous said...

Look to any relationship of Bill or Melinda Gates and representative shill Appleton. It has all the hallmarks of Gates interaction.

wishbone said...

this is not really about stopping you protecting your family and property from nasty people, this IS about taking away your right to protect your country from the "ZIONIST DOMESTIC ENEMY WITHIN YOUR GOVERNMENT" who now reside in washington. first they will make it illegal for you to defend yourself, family, property from anyone. then they will (with the help of some more "word triggered sleeper killers" incidents) take away your "right to bare arms" and take away any weapons you own, then the only americans who will have weapons will be the military, police,and dark agencies who's main job will be protecting those zionist enemies within, from you. then you will be under the boot-heel of a bunch of bastards who will make nazi's look like nice-guys. YOU GOT A BIG PROBLEM AMERICA.!

Anonymous said...

It is ironic that over the past few years, more & more states are repealing what I call "duty to retreat" laws. Concealed carry laws have been passed in many states recently, and "Castle Doctrine" laws have been passed. Many include the right to use deadly force anywhere at anytime one feels their life is threatened. I do NOT want to use deadly force. However I mostly do not want to be killed because some legal clown thinks we can just submit & an attacker will honor that & let us go. Please note this from libertyfund.org that was just posted on the internet.........
"Not long after the New Year, a woman in Loganville, Georgia, was working in the upstairs office of her home when she spied someone lurking outside.

The suspicious man, Paul Slater, was about to break into her home with a crowbar. Fortunately, before he could do that, the woman hid herself and her two nine-year-old twins in an attic crawlspace. Unfortunately, Slater found out where they were hiding. Fortunately, the woman had a gun; as soon as the intruder menacingly presented himself, she shot him.

Alas, after shooting six times and hitting Slater five, the woman ran out of bullets. But she had the presence of mind to tell the would-be assailant that she would fire again if he moved. Then she took the kids to a neighbor. The thug tried to escape in his car, but was too seriously injured to get far."

The woman could escape only after the intruder was subdued to the extent she knew or had reasonable confidence he could no longer pursue her & the kids. But also note that it seems those magazine limitations can end up costing lives. Only quick thinking saved the woman & her kids. And as was astutely pointed out, what if there was more than one intruder? Once criminals know there are limitations, there is no way to know how far they might go! Also, please note (for the 'duty to retreat crowd'), this woman tried to retreat to a supposedly safe place w/ kids. The intruder kept looking til he found them. Without a gun, its definitely possible this would have been a multiple homocide report!

Anonymous said...

You are under the assumption that laws protect our rights. I do not need words to tell me I have a right to defend myself. Codifying our rights makes them susceptible to interpretation. Then the courts get to decide how to implement that interpretation. Then law enforcement kidnaps violaters of that interpretation and throws said violators into state run dungeons. The legal system isn't there to protect our rights.

Anonymous said...

Please also keep in mind that the Supreme Court
itself has ruled that law enforcement has NO
duty to protect you...none. They can, literally,
stand around and watch you be assaulted or killed
and do nothing. Remember that next time some
ignorant soul says "just call 911". No thanks.

JBW said...

Welllll, you have the LOCAL SHERIFF ARREST the 'politician' for TREASON and/or SEDITION and take him to the county jail...THAT is HOW you begin to deal with them...

Anonymous said...

Yawn. Get a clue lemming. You have never lived in an Islamic country nor met a muslim. If you have nothing of substance to add to the discussion please refrain from posting...

Post a Comment